Down With Photoshopping

the (evil) power of photoshopping

Retouching photographs of models in magazines and newspapers has been a point of controversy in the publishing industry ever since technology like Photoshop has become readily available. Most magazines, especially ones dedicated to fashion and/or celebrity stalking, have no qualms about retouching “imperfect” pictures. I think this practice is absolutely reprehensible.

There are instances when it’s appropriate to retouch photograph. For example, if a person in a photograph has red eye or some stray hairs, or the lighting isn’t good, or if there’s some other imperfection that doesn’t change the concept of the picture to a ridiculous degree, I don’t see a problem with that. I do take issue with pictures retouched to the point that the original subject is unrecognizable or completely changed, especially …

Ralph Lauren…WTF?

Ralph Lauren has created some seriously disturbingly photoshopped ads lately:

as many have already noted - her head is definitely bigger than her pelvis

Ralph Lauren’s defense? They released this statement:

For over 42 years we have built a brand based on quality and integrity. After further investigation, we have learned that we are responsible for the poor imaging and retouching that resulted in a very distorted image of a woman’s body.

Oh, hey, maybe an apology for basically promoting an anatomically impossible aesthetic would be nice? Anybody else feel like essentially they’re saying “Sorry you have a problem with it” …?

And then there are the reports that the first photoshopped model above, who is a size 4, was fired for being “too fat.”